The broken ecclesiology that dominates the Evangelical scene
is bearing a rotten harvest. Cultural attitudes and tensions, false
expectations, and alternatives born of the technological age have created
conditions in which men are leaving Church leadership for other 'ministries'.
In some cases we must say good riddance but few seem willing or able to address
the real reasons for this trend and identify the nature of the problem. It
starts with an unbiblical ecclesiology – especially in the Evangelical and New
Calvinist spheres.
First, the Magisterial Reformation did not break with the
sacerdotal model of the Catholic parochial system. Instead they modified it and
the priest became a pastor – a reform of sorts but not a return to the New
Testament.
The plurality of elders envisioned in the New Testament and
the earliest post-apostolic writings was abandoned for practical reasons during
the doctrinal struggles of the second and third centuries. Given the
circumstances it was an understandable but unfortunate development that would
be later transformed into the full sacerdotal system by the medieval theology
that developed around the mass.
The Reformers rolled things back to about the second or third
century in terms of local and regional ecclesiology but they didn't go all the
way back to the New Testament. This reality is despite the many contrived
arguments utilised by Presbyterians, Lutherans, and others to justify their trimmed
down but nevertheless extra-biblical polities.
The bottom line is this, the cleric-pastor model was retained
and continues up to the present hour. In many cases it has morphed into
something of a CEO – but one of many areas that the modern Western Church has
sought to emulate the business and marketing world when it comes to
ecclesiology. Aside from these polities representing a functional denial of
Scriptural authority, the sad fact is the world's wisdom doesn't work when
applied to the Church. In some cases their ploys and schemes can generate
numbers but they're not numbers that can be sustained and time reveals a real
lack of substance. It's building the Church by means other than the Holy Spirit
– something Paul refers to as hay and stubble that will not stand up to fire.
On a practical level the pastor model is flawed because it
lays too much of a burden on the shoulders of one man – something no one man is
equipped to do. True plurality (as opposed to the faux plurality practiced in
some bodies) becomes impractical because of the denominational and
tradition-related requirements concerning seminary education, ordination, and
pay.
To wade into the debates is somewhat maddening because there
are solutions to this but no one wants to hear them. The educational
requirements (and seminary model) are flawed as is the institutional system
that grants the credentials – yet another case of the world (and Catholicism) being
emulated. Pay can be thought of in different terms. More men could be supported
but maybe they're only supported part time. Maybe middle class life and its
expectations aren't possible as men called into ministry will struggle to make
ends meet on the wages they earn from the world and the money they're paid by
the church. Those that struggle on the Church end need to re-examine what it is
they think they're doing and why. Of course Protestant Vocationalism has
reduced the nature of the calling to serve the Church and has all but equated
it with the 'calling' of someone else to be a banker, lawyer, or to embrace
some other lucrative career. Since these mundane professions are valued as equally
important to the Kingdom, the appeal for someone to become a 'pastor' had
better be somewhat enticing.
There are layers of error here that have to be worked
through.
And much more could be said about the absurd amounts of money
wasted on buildings, grounds, and the other extra-biblical (and sometimes
anti-biblical) accoutrements associated with them.
Pastors (in many cases) have too much laid upon them and yet
some are also lazy and distracted. I've also noticed that for many of them
'traditional' marriages aren't all that traditional any more. We don't need
'co-pastor' wives, a ridiculous and unbiblical notion, but notice there are Biblical
requirements for the wives of bishops and deacons. Why? It should be obvious – because
if they're not on board and of like mind and disposition then the man will not
be able to fulfill his task. Today, I see pastors with modern family models,
career wives and the like. It's no wonder the pastor's can't function. In the
last church we attended, he engaged in pastoral work during the day and his
wife worked in a nearby town. In the evenings he understandably wanted to spend
time with his wife but the problem is for church leaders you need to have some
evenings free to meet with your congregation – most of whom are going to work
during the day and be unable to meet during daytime hours. I tried for about
eighteen months to meet with the pastor. I wanted to get together, have a
coffee, and talk. It never happened. The only way I could have made it happen was
for me to take an afternoon off work. I could have done so but didn't. I have
my reasons. But the fact that he was willing to just drop the ball (as it were)
demonstrates that his entire understanding of the calling was flawed.
Now if his wife was home where (according to the New
Testament) she should have been, then he would have been seeing her on and off
throughout most of the day. They would have had breakfast together, lunch on
many days and so forth. It's a different kind of life, a full family life and
yet with unconventional hours. But if you're not willing to live it – then go
get a normal mundane kind of job. The life of a bishop-elder is a special
calling. It's not for every man as the relevant Scripture passages make clear.
The para-church has opened up a host of new opportunities.
You can get into Church 'ministry' by aligning with one of these parallel
organisations. You can make a decent salary, work regular office hours, maybe
get to travel, and live the same kind of Church-focused 'ministry' life sans the daily pastoral grind, and the
headaches and stress associated with getting your hands dirty and engaging
people and the difficulties they face in life.
The problem is the para-church cannot replace the Church and
in many cases undermines it. Baptistic-Evangelical ecclesiologies have allowed
it to do so. Their theologies have created a Christian life largely devoid of
the sacraments and any concept of God-ordained means and forms for the
Christian life. The para-church scratches a consumer itch – and one at targeted
audiences at that. Some of these organisations have limited value but they've
also been demonstrated to be subversive and at times dangerous. Church for many
people becomes akin to team sport along with its stars and celebrities. The
focus shifts from congregational fellowship to media, sensational events and
marketing ploys.
There are so many schools, organisations, counseling ministries,
lobbying groups, camps, retreats, radio and television organisations,
charities, and the like. And they all generate numerous positions related to
management, administration, bureaucracy, IT, transportation etc. – all of which
are considered 'ministry'-related works, even though many of the latter are
tasks that require no special spiritual gifts or skills. They are jobs that
essentially translate into the secular sphere.
But all this (right or wrong) is considered 'ministry' and
thus analogous to service within the local church.
It's no wonder local church office has been downgraded and in
many cases deemed undesirable. By comparison it's a life in the trenches with
little in the way of reward. The 'ministry' associated folks I've known are
able (in some cases) to live the jet-set life, zipping here and there for this
and that conference. They're busy folks. Whether what they do serves the Church
or simply builds the profile of a non-profit business (and in many cases
enriches its leaders) – that's something else.
The last congregation we attended was near a camp/ranch
'ministry' (which I personally hope fails and shuts down), that regularly
supplied young men as Sunday preachers – even though none of these men had any
desire or intention of going into the 'Church' as they say. They were all
involved in para-church ministry and (it seemed) planned to stay there.
Counseling, recruitment, academic and administrative pursuits were their forte.
They were happy to 'fill a pulpit' as they say but they were not interested in
shepherding a congregation, teaching long term, administering sacraments, and
engaging in church discipline.
I'm not sure how qualified these men were to teach or why
they were being given the platform. It was assumed that because they were in
Christian 'ministry' that they had some kind of preference or precedence in
terms of their ability. This also ties in with a question concerning middle
aged and older men in the Church (I'm speaking generally). There is a great deal
of sloth to be found in many circles I've encountered, an unwillingness to step
up and lead. In many cases these are men that have been spiritual vegetables
for decades far more consumed with career, football teams, and hobbies than
church life. Is it any wonder (though no less shameful) that women and ministry
apparatchiks step forward and fill in the gap?
There is also a great deal of stress put upon pastors, a
stress generated by a crisis of integrity. In order to retain their position
they must abandon it – integrity that is. Rigorous preaching and a true
shepherding of the flock in the paths of righteousness will lead to a loss in
numbers and a loss in congregational income. Worldly-minded congregations hire
CEO-pastors with the expectation that numbers will increase (akin to the stock
value going up). A pastor who drives away people by faithful preaching or
otherwise puts them off (by means of Church discipline) will not last long even
if his 'tough love' was called for.
And so pastors tend to wilt, compromise, and I don't doubt (indeed
I know) some grow frustrated and bitter. Again, the model is wrong as there
should be a true plurality of men leading the congregation – not a hired gun
who leads a group of men who are unclear as to what their actual task is (if
any).*
And because pastors have been trained to think of their
office as a career, job and/or professional position, they embrace the culture's
attitudes and expectations regarding remuneration and lifestyle. Some
denominations encourage this and want their clerics to be of the same social
class, standing, and income as say a mid-level lawyer, doctor, or other
professional.
In additional to being unbiblical it's a paradigm that breeds
discontent and fosters a wrong attitude all the way around.
Finally, the cultural divisions are adding an additional
layer of stress. As more and more Christians abandon Scripture for the
epistemology-hermeneutic of BibleFOX, the syncretism of Right-wing values (as
framed by Right-wing media) and select elements of Scripture, congregations are
tense and will easily fall prey to schism. Libertarian individualism will not
sit under teaching that challenges its worldly assumptions and ethics. Pastors
are left isolated and trapped. Any attempt to address these issues will bring
down wrath from some other quarter in the congregation or denomination (another
unbiblical ecclesiological model). They try to hold the line and hold things in
balance and yet in such situations the end can only prove a defeat. All sides
will grow frustrated with them and I'm sure many just throw their hands up into
air – filled with exasperation. I most certainly know one or two.
What's needed is reform – true New Testament reform of
ecclesiology. And yet people won't have it because they want their creature
comforts and the respect that comes with a 'proper' building. The money that
pays for buildings could be used to salary more men in terms of church
leadership. Missions could be given a lot more, and one would hope the same
kinds of reform would come to the current missionary paradigm which is also
deeply corrupt.
In our case, our pastor decided to bail out – he was tempted
away by an offer from a Christian university. He wanted to pal around with youth,
shoot basketball, and maybe do some sermons and chapels on the side. He wants
to travel to conferences and recruit. He had no interest in being a leader or
shepherd to a congregation or discipling people in the Scriptures. Immature and
misguided, he left the congregation in a lurch but the other para-church folks
from the nearby camp/ranch came to his defense, resorting to what some call
psycho-babble and Charismatic type speech – he 'has' to do what the Lord is
calling him to do. He has to pursue the ministry God is giving him. Questioning
his intuition was akin to questioning God Himself. It was ridiculous, a case of
circling the wagons – 'ministry' minions backing each other at the expense of a
congregation which was subsequently decimated.
He had the ministry right in front of him. It was too boring
and too difficult and I think he wanted more money and free time. So he walked
away with his head held high – because after all he's still in 'ministry'.
There's no slight irony to the fact that the linked article
was written and produced by a para-church organisation's website.
Until these issues are seriously addressed, nothing is going
to change. But at this point the para-church machine is a colossus, a self-perpetuating
service-industrial complex (as it were). It's not going to be taken on without
a massive fight and casualties. The aforementioned congregation would most
certainly fragment over any attempt to question these models and call out the
camp/ranch for the unbiblical and corrupt organisation that it is. To be frank,
I would rather it see it close down and for the people involved to go and get
regular (and in many cases 'real') jobs and learn to be content with the kind
of church life ordained by God and to hold a view of Scripture that doesn't
need to resort to spiritual gimmicks (which is all the ranch-camp is), but
instead seeks to build the Church and to worship by the means ordained by God.
A summer camp or horse ranch is a fine thing but what they're doing isn't 'ministry',
it's a cheap and frankly often sacrilegious imitation and substitute for
Church-rooted Christian life.
----
*The Presbyterians think they have this but under their
crypto-episcopal system the same pastor-congregation tensions are wont to
remain. And the pastor remains a cleric, part of and accountable to the
so-called presbytery – the regional body of ecclesiastics that are the real
core of the system.
I say so-called presbytery because the term is Biblical,
referencing a local council of elders. Presbyterians expand the term and read
their hierarchical definition of a regional body of clerics that control
congregational existence and ordination within a district, along with a
contrived bureaucracy of courts and committees, back into the text making it
say something it does not.